June 16, 2014

The Shark Must Look Like A Minnow From Up There

Several times in recent weeks I’ve found myself in conversations with liberals who shake their heads sadly and express their disappointment with President Obama. Why? I suspect that they’re being influenced, often without realizing it, by the prevailing media narrative.

The narrative? Not, just to dwell on the last couple of weeks, the VA debacle, the Bergdahl debacle, or the meltdowns in the Ukraine and the Levant? Or, channeling my inner Progressive, the Cheney-NSA regime, the drone wars, the gun control collapse, the immigration collapse, the Children's Crusade - geez, what's a lib to do?

The accepted thing, it seems, is to portray Mr. Obama as floundering, his presidency as troubled if not failed.

But this is all wrong. You should judge leaders by their achievements, not their press, and in terms of policy substance Mr. Obama is having a seriously good year.

Really:

Mr. Obama is having a seriously good year. In fact, there’s a very good chance that 2014 will go down in the record books as one of those years when America took a major turn in the right direction.

That comes to us live from the Reality Base. On my planet a few more good years like this one and any remaining Democrats will vote to remove the letters "B" and "O" from the alphabet. But we agree that 2014 is likely to go into the record books.

The Earnest Prof divulges the recipe for his Kool-aid:

First, health reform is now a reality — and despite a shambolic start, it’s looking like a big success story. Remember how nobody was going to sign up? First-year enrollments came in above projections. Remember how people who signed up weren’t actually going to pay their premiums? The vast majority have.

Uh huh. Health care is such a success that no Demeocrat anywhere is willing to run on it. We all expect a wave of waivers this summer as Obama tries to shield voters from the emerging reality this November. And FWIW, no, I don't remember how "people who signed up weren’t actually going to pay their premiums". I remember headlines that "only" about 80 percent of enrollees would pay their prmiums, and that seems to have been borne out.

Then there’s climate policy. The Obama administration’s new rules on power plants won’t be enough in themselves to save the planet, but they’re a real start — and are by far the most important environmental initiative since the Clean Air Act. I’d add that this is an issue on which Mr. Obama is showing some real passion.

Let's cut to the Times analysis of the President's new proposals, which have yet to survive the regulatory review process. First, some context:

Thanks partly to a surfeit of natural gas that few people saw coming, emissions in the United States have already fallen 10 percent from 2005 levels and are still heading down, even without Mr. Obama’s new rule.

Then:

It is clear Mr. Obama’s immediate goal is not to solve the emissions problem, but to get the country moving faster in the right direction. The new rule alone offers little hope that the United States and other nations can achieve cuts on a scale required to meet the internationally agreed limit on global warming. But experts say that achieving the pledge Mr. Obama made in Copenhagen — a 17 percent reduction in the nation’s greenhouse gases by 2020, compared with the 2005 level — would be quite likely, if his plan survives.

And:

Yet, by itself, the president’s plan will barely nudge the global emissions that scientists say are threatening the welfare of future generations.

“Is it enough to stop climate change? No,” said Ted Nordhaus, chairman of the Breakthrough Institute, an environmental think tank in Oakland, Calif. “No political leader in the world has a serious agenda to do that.”

After lauding financial reform as "much weaker than it should have been" but "real" Krugman rallies for the Big Finish:

Put it all together, and Mr. Obama is looking like a very consequential president indeed.

the problem clearly is not Gitmo, it's the environment these lads come from and return to,
similarly the league to prevent credentialed prog idiocy I mean chartered accountancy must
always be on the case,,

I stand up to defend Krugman. Remember Krugman's role. His reason for being an op ed columnist is to provide reassurance to the .001 percenter gentry progs that their contributions to Dems, prog pacs and prog nonprofits are doing some good. His op eds are not serious (or even semi-serious) thought pieces. I think Krugs is doing the best he can to keep the money flow going to prog causes.

ThomC/JiB- I agree with both of you that 'Krugman' is both just mailing it in, and only trying to keep the LeftyReadership happy. But I stand by my guess that the 'Krugman' writing this drek is wife #2 named Robin Krugman. Krugman's middle name is 'Robin' and he married 2 women named Robin. Huh? What's wrong with Krugman is no small thing.

TomM-- makes a brilliant point:
"
After lauding financial reform as "much weaker than it should have been" but "real" Krugman rallies for the Big Finish:

'Put it all together, and Mr. Obama is looking like a very consequential president indeed.'

As was Jimmy Carter."

Jimmah was most consequential because he gaves us 28 years of POTUS candidates running as 'conservativs' to win elections. It took the Housing Bubble and bond finance meltdown in 2008 to change that. For our kids sakes I hope Obummer is just as consequential on future elections.

NK:
You have summed it up nicely.
ACA has been a bait and switch scheme from the get-go. The real tell was the 5.5 million cancellations, the fake numbers on enrollees and now the revelation that many subsidies are based on a pack of lies just like the law itself. Non-payers == not enrolled. It is a less than zero sum game that has duped the progs.

DD-- I just have bad feelings about this game. Ghana matches USA physicality and has 2-3 brilliant attacking players who can get a goal and grab the 3 points, like Ivory Coast did against Japan. I just don't like the matchup; I have no idea how it plays out.

BTW-- as people pointed out saturday, I don't take offense to TomM's and commenters' soccer snark. I enjoy watching the game, but I don't try to convince others to join in. It's a relatively small part of the populaion, but US soccer fans are passionate, and for real, contrary to the WSJ's snarky Brit reporter on Thursday.

As militants posted graphic photos appearing to show mass executions of captured Iraqi soldiers, the White House reportedly is holding out hope there's still time to pursue a diplomatic solution.

The New York Times reported Monday that, according to a senior administration official, the White House wants to test the possibility of Iraq agreeing to a new unity government and sees a brief window for diplomacy.

According to the official, the White House wants to see if Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's Shiite-led government can work with the Kurds and reach out to the Sunni minority, and assure them that the government can be an "ally."

Yeah NK. When Portugal is the "easy" group game you are in big trouble. Basically, the US needs to out run and out hit Ghana to beat them -- and do it from the first whistle. (Not Landon's type of game for those keeping score).

Henry-- even worse in my opinion, given the inexperience in the USA back line, Ghana will score (even if it takes a Sepp Blatter instigated penalty kick award) so the USA will have to score to even get a point. Tough situation.

No one said this, you drooling cretin. Your boi-idol and his hacks forced people who had insurance to lose it so they could turn around and buy a more expensive, but crappier plan just so you and your UWS cretins could feel good about yourselves.

Henry-- USA - Ghana just got bigger. Portugal look shambolic and they are down to 10 against ze Germanz, with pepe sent off for a headbutt. So pepe ineligible against USA. If there is a winner in USA-Ghana, they have a wide open door. A draw, creates mischief in that murky FIFA world.

BTW: Referee crew for USA-Ghana is swedish. Eriksson the Ref is an experienced UEFA ref, not sure if that's good or not.

Another conspiracy "theory" becomes conspiracy "fact" as The FT reports "a cluster of central banking investors has become major players on world equity markets." The report, to be published this week by the Official Monetary and Financial Institutions Forum (OMFIF), confirms $29.1tn in market investments, held by 400 public sector institutions in 162 countries, which "could potentially contribute to overheated asset prices.".....

....So there it is... conspiracy fact - Central Banks around the world are buying stocks in increasing size.To summarize, the global equity market is now one massive Ponzi scheme in which the dumb money are central banks themselves, the same banks who inject the liquidity to begin with.That would explain this.

I don't get 'encourage donations' from this requiem. I don't see this as encouragement for even the prog flatworms who comprise the NYT subscriber base to reach for their checkbooks. This was more like a soporific or analgesic in preparation for the coming prog dirt nap (they'll be back - zombies always come back).

I also believe the damage to the Democrat Fascists done by Obama will surpass that done by Carter by an order of magnitude. It will take a few more cycles to play out but the OPM Famine coupled with the faculty lounge ineptitude of the remaining progressive lice will result in rotting isolation of the Blue Hell cesspools within ten years. Detroit is the bare beginning.

Notably, the Breitbart Texas editor stated that the Obama administration has devised a plan to continuously shift holding areas for the children to avoid state or local Child Protective Services coming in to investigate them. So long as the children are housed on federal property such as military bases, the government can avoid scrutiny.

And yet last week in NYS Court my friend Justice Ramos (ethnic greek, with a shortened surname) dismissed a bond investor lawsuit against the big MBS syndicators (GS, BOA, Citi, JPM) because the bond disclosures were truthful and the investors never demanded additional info in due diligence that would have exposed the weakness of the Bond collateral. All of the players were greedy, and not surprisngly, the big bond issuers covered themselves. GREEDY homeowners is more like it.

In the history never repeats column;Chinese buying US golf courses.
Considering how much they hate the Nipponese, the free market Maoists sure are going out of their way to replicate the Land of the Setting Sun's planned economy disaster of the 80's.

That's not the 'record owner' system used in these parts; the mortgage is not the record event, the Note is. Unless the Note is 'nonrecourse' the debt isn't extingushed by walking away. Old fashioned, but it disciplines the system.

"DD-- I just have bad feelings about this game. Ghana matches USA physicality and has 2-3 brilliant attacking players who can get a goal and grab the 3 points"

Oh they're going to destroy us within the first 4 or 5 minutes,trust me. Also,when we get a corner and commit men into their box, watch Ghana on the break...your jaw will drop seeing 6 of their players cover an entire pitch in 8 or 9 strides charging toward our terrified, shambling, pitiful defense .....these guys don't play pretty skillful Brazilian type soccer...they play FREIGHT TRAIN SOCCER AND WE ARE DOOMED!!!!

Unless the Note is 'nonrecourse' the debt isn't extingushed by walking away.

That varies a lot by state, as I understand it, and also in practice regardless of the black and white of the terms. (I believe CA mortgages are recourse loans, but it's rarely worth going after someone who walks away.)

As for "stupid homeowners," the plaintiffs in the case were, as best as I can tell, institutional investors, at least some of whom got bailed out by their governments. Any wonder that they were a bit sloppy in their due diligence?

Most places, that is true only if the bank agrees to make it so, which they might if offered a deed in lieu of foreclosure so that the bank gets the keys quickly and with less damage than they might if the defaulting borrower is allowed to game the system for months and months and tear up the house.

And then if the bank does accept the house and forgives part of the note, then that is "Forgiveness of Debt" Income as far as the IRS is concerned.

All unless as stated above it was a non recourse loan going in, or if it is one of the few states that make the loans automatically non recourse.

Porch- The Brits used to call it 'the magic sponge' Historically, diving was verbotten in the UK; is was considered cheating and unmanly. So the Brits were outraged when they'd play the Italians or Portuguese, and a player would go down from a 'challenge' roll around for a good 10 seconds, then a trainer would come on, rub the leg with wet sponge and --miraculously-- the player runs like a hare.

Speaking of flopping, I find it amusing (as in projectile vomit producing) that the NBA penalizes repeat floppers but not the zebras who are conned by them into calling something that didn't happen. I've done intramural reffing before (and received praise from both teams) and if I don't see something happen it doesn't get called; and if somebody bitches about it I say "look, I'm only calling what I actually see. I'm not perfect and I might miss something but only actual contact which I see gets called." That's not a hard standard to adhere to. With a 4-1 final result the refs are a non-factor and they generally did a good job; but they got conned on some flops.

CaptH-- that's a very professional officiating philosophy. Personally, I am very stingy awarding Penalty Kicks, and when I am asked (OK they are actually screaming) by player/coaches "HOW COULD THAT NOT BE A PENALTY" I just say "I didn't see one... play on"

So remember that kangaroo trial they mounted against General Rios Montt by the UN and the NGOs, well that was for our side, for their side, the Gitmo prosecutor allegedly tells
our fishwraps's devil's advocate for said detainees, there's no point for a war crimes
prosecution, for Fazl, Nabi and co,

Even in a single action state, the noteholder retains the right to choose who or what to pursue. So a person of some means might well find himself pursued for judgment when the lender finds the collateral to be worth less than the judgment is thought to be. A judgment against Warren Buffet would probably be thought to be worth every penny, while a lien on a tract of land in East Omaha might not.

As a couple of folks have stated, unless it says "Non-recourse" against the maker, it most certainly is recourse.

That's right, NK. The important thing is to have a good partner in reffing so you can both be in good position to see things on and off the ball. Rebound fouls are a chore to call because you have two bodies banging against each other and figuring out who has what position isn't easy. You have to keep the game from getting out of control, If somebody is losing it they get a quick warning and then a T if they don't back off. If two guys are having their own private war they get told to both cut the crap. Having a fight is the worst thing that can happen followed by one team honestly believing they lost because of the refs. I steered clear of both of those (I didn't do a lot of games so the N is small). I did it because every dorm had to provide refs for intramurals. I thought I'd really hate it (and was pretty miserable doing games with my roommate who was terrible) but having a good ref partner makes it pretty much a breeze.